Local election results represent a watershed for Downing Street - they show
that Mr Cameron must change tack.

For the over-excited inhabitants of Westminster, every set of local elections can feel like a seismic moment. Few, however, mark a genuine rupture. As the Conservatives lick their wounds after Thursday’s polls, and Labour counts its gains, the question that will preoccupy all parties is whether the outcome represents a fundamental rejection of David Cameron, or a temporary rift.

In purely electoral terms, the results were hardly surprising. Each party performed roughly according to expectations, and each has some positives to draw on. The Liberal Democrats suffered, but proved more resilient than expected in fighting off the Tories in the South. Labour strengthened its grip on its working-class base, regained a toehold in Middle England and denied the SNP in Glasgow. The Tories lost seats – but were defending a landslide victory four years ago. To put Ed Miliband’s performance into perspective, the Conservatives won back roughly 500 more seats at the same stage of the Blair government.

The most important legacy of this contest, therefore, is not its impact on the electoral map. It is the sense that these results represent a watershed for Downing Street. David Cameron cannot simply write off his party’s unpopularity as the natural mid-term response to an administration bent on constraining public spending at a time of economic stagnation. In recent months, his Government has been shown to be flawed in gravely worrying ways.

First, there is the question of basic competence. Ever since a poorly constructed and amateurishly marketed Budget, the Tories have been in a state of permanent crisis, almost all of it self-inflicted. As Charles Moore writes opposite, there are significant questions over the performance of the Downing Street operation, and its ability to formulate and deliver policy. A particular concern is the dominant role of the Civil Service, and the paucity of political and strategic thinkers.

It is the second flaw, however, that is the more serious. Mr Cameron is a charismatic leader who has refreshed his party, and made it far more comfortable with the modern world. But his political strategy and positioning are failing to deliver. By making a totem of issues such as overseas aid and gay marriage, he has alienated core voters without winning new ones. The result of adhering to a Westminster definition of the centre ground, and trying to be all things to all people, is that the Conservative Party now appears to lack the message, the focus, and the strategy to win a majority.

How can this be fixed? To see where things are going wrong, consider the attempt to introduce elected mayors. This was a bold reform with the potential to reinvigorate local government. Yet it was overwhelmingly rejected. Why? Partly, because the Government failed to make more than a desultory case for it. But mostly, because voters simply did not care: any kind of constitutional tinkering, whether it be switching to the Alternative Vote or reforming the House of Lords, is a matter of supreme indifference. What they care about – and what Mr Cameron must preoccupy himself with – are earthier issues: fixing the economy, cutting the cost of living, getting tough on crime and welfare dependency, restricting immigration, standing up to Europe on human rights.

Such a strategy is being dismissed as a “lurch to the Right”. But what it actually represents is a lurch towards the public, a fresh offering that appeals to hard-pressed families and striving workers – to those looking for a reason to vote Tory and thus far failing to find one. Mr Cameron must convince such people that he shares their fears and aspirations, and is willing to face down his Coalition partners in defence of them. It is no accident that Boris Johnson defied the electoral tide: his brand of confident, compassionate, populist Toryism exudes precisely that sense of reassurance.

The next few weeks are not going to be pleasant for the Government. The Queen’s Speech looks likely to produce an underwhelming programme, and will anyway be overshadowed by the appearances of Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson in front of the Leveson Inquiry, Meanwhile, uncertainty lingers over the fate of Jeremy Hunt, the Culture Secretary. The Prime Minister must, however, find the time to listen to constructive criticism, and to consider where things are going wrong. He remains a consummate politician, and a fine leader of his party. His challenge now is to lead it in the right direction.